Leila Farokhbakht, M.A. TEFL, University of Isfahan, Iran Effect of Using... · 2 children. The available options were either to adapt them to the needs and requisites of younger

1

The Effect of Using Multisensory-based Phonics in Teaching Literacy on EFL Young

Female/Male Learners' Early Reading Motivation

Leila Farokhbakht, M.A. TEFL, University of Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

The present study sought to investigate the effect of adopting a multisensory-based

phonics (i.e. Jolly Phonics) for teaching early English literacy skills on the reading motivation of

Iranian EFL young learners. It also aimed to find out whether there is a significant gender

difference in the effect of this multisensory method on enhancing boys’ and girls’ early reading

motivation. To this end, 100 zero-beginners of English (50 boys and 50 girls) aged between 10 to

12 participated in this study. Among the 50 boys participating in this study, 25 were randomly

assigned to the experimental group and 25 were assigned to the control group. Likewise, from

among the 50 girl participants, 25 of them were randomly assigned to the experimental group

and the other 25 were assigned to the control group. While the students in the control group were

taught basic English literacy skills through the rote traditional phonics, the learners in the

experimental group were taught English literacy (i.e. letter-sound knowledge and reading &

writing in the word level) via a synthetic multisensory-based phonics named Jolly Phonics. After

a one-month English course, all the participants filled in a 4-point scale Early Reading

Motivation Questionnaire (ERMQ). A set of descriptive and inferential statistics were used to

analyze students’ scores obtained from the questionnaire. The results revealed that the

experimental (Jolly Phonics) group had a higher motivation in early English reading skills than

the control group. The findings also showed that the multisensory-based phonics had a more

positive effect on boys’ reading motivation than girls’.

Key words: phonics, multisensory approach, young learners, literacy, reading motivation

1. Introduction

The importance of motivation in academic achievement has drawn researchers’ attention

to itself over the years. “Researchers have claimed that better motivated students perform better

in school grades and other achievement outcomes” (Hornery, Craven, Yung & Ali, 2008: 2).

For quite a long time, research on affective learner factors were mostly carried out on

adult learners because it was believed that young learners resemble one another to the extent that

inquiry of such individual difference variables would not be fruitful at all. The popular

assumption was that all children have high levels of motivation to learn FLs, have very positive

attitudes and are successful in learning languages by default. However, MacIntyre, Baker,

Clement and Donovan (2002) notify that young learners differ among themselves just the same

as more mature learners do. Therefore, investigations into young learners’ individual differences

are crucial (Mihaljevic Djigunovic, 2012).

Research on attitudes and motivation in FL learning has a long history (e.g., Dornyei,

1990; Gardner & Lambert, 1959, 1972; Nikolov, 2002; Vilke, 1979), however, the inceptions of

such investigations with young FL learners were somehow complicated. The existing

instruments were mostly appropriate for older learners and could not automatically be used with

2

children. The available options were either to adapt them to the needs and requisites of younger

age groups or design completely new ones (Mihaljevic Djigunovic, 2012).

Despite the fact that motivation and attitudes are two distinct individual learner factors,

they are closely inter-related and are frequently investigated together. "While language attitudes

refer to positive or negative feelings about a language and what the learner may connect it with

(Gardner &MacIntyre,1993), Gardner (1985, 2010) defines motivation as a combination of the

desire to learn the language, positive attitudes to learning the language, and the effort invested in

learning" (Mihaljevic Djigunovic, 2012: 57).

Until recently, motivation and attitudes were regarded in terms of their relationship with

learner achievement and considered as the cause of learning success (e.g., Burstall, 1975; Vilke,

1979). However, more recently some researchers (e.g., Blondin et al., 1998; Edelenbos,

Johnstone, & Kubanek, 2007) have pointed out that attitudes and motivation should be looked at

as an aim and the outcome of early FL learning. Attitudes and motivation are not any more solely

thought of as single variables in relation to learning outcomes, but they are often viewed as

interacting with other individual learner characteristics, such as language anxiety, language

aptitude, language learning styles and strategies, and the like. Furthermore, it is observed that the

developmental aspects of motivation and attitudes are taking on importance (e.g., Mihaljević

Djigunović & Lopriore, 2011; Nikolov, 2002). This can indicate the dynamics of young learners’

affective development, which reveals the complex characteristics of early FL learning

(Mihaljevic Djigunovic, 2012).

On the contrary, in the 1970s language learning achievement was defined and evaluated

with regard to the number of linguistic structures young learners were able to master within a

particular learning period, which led to deciding against early FL learning in some contexts such

as Britain. But due to the contributions made in the developments of young learners' affective

factors, nowadays young learners are seen as significant sources of data which have

multidimensional and dynamic characteristics. However, despite the major progresses in the

studies on young learners' motivation and attitudes, a lot remains to be investigated in this area.

The most recent developments in motivational research such as L2 motivational self-esteem have

been connected with older learners and have not yet concerned younger learners. Therefore,

research innovations and reconceptualizations are seen as necessary in this field. Since age is a

key factor in FL learning, there seems to be a need for young learner motivation to be

conceptualized differently from older learner motivation (Mihaljevic Djigunovic, 2012)

Since literacy skills such as reading might have a determining influence on later

educational outcomes of students, they require motivation. According to Gambrell, Palmer,

Codling and Mazzoni (1996), teachers have recognized motivation as the heart of many

problems they encounter in teaching young learners to read. Therefore, finding ways to enhance

the reading motivation of learners from the very beginning stages of language learning seems to

be critical.

Different methods of phonics have long been used in teaching the letter-sound

correspondences, alphabet and other early literacy skills. However, there is a paucity of research

in the literature that have compared and investigated the effect of different phonics instructions

on children’s reading motivation. Thus, the researcher in the present study seeks to discover

whether adopting a multisensory-based phonics (i.e. Jolly Phonics) for teaching early literacy

skills is going to improve EFL young learners’ early reading motivation. Moreover, the effect of

this approach on early reading motivation of learners of different sexes will be investigated.

3

Jolly Phonics is a fun and child-centered approach to teaching literacy which has actions

for each of the 42 letter sounds of English and teaches the five key skills for reading and writing

by using a multisensory approach. These five skills include learning the letter sounds which

consist of the alphabet sounds as well as diagraphs (e.g. sh, ai, etc.), learning letter formation,

blending, segmenting, and tricky words that have irregular spellings and children learn them

separately in this method (“Teaching Literacy with Jolly Phonics”, December 2014).

2. Literature review

2.1. Eliciting data on attitudes and motivation of young language learners

According to Mihaljevic Djigunovic (2012) investigating young learners’ motivation and

attitudes is rather complicated. Children sometimes find it difficult to express their thoughts,

perceptions and feelings. Therefore, it is of great importance that appropriate instruments and

procedures are made use of. "Young learners have been observed to be a very valuable source of

information on early FL learning" (Enever, 2011; Nikolov, 2002). The same as studies with older

learners, questionnaires are often used to collect data on young learners’ motivation and

attitudes. With younger children usually smiley questionnaires are used (Szpotowicz, Mihaljević

Djigunović, & Enever, 2009). They are considered as age-appropriate for young learners because

they consist of visual scales that children can easily relate to. In smiley questionnaires, children

choose a happy, sad or indifferent smiley according to how they feel or think about the language

learning aspect in question.

Relatively lots of studies have been carried out on the attitudes and motivation of young

learners as opposed to older or adult learners. Most of the research on age-related differences in

motivation and attitudes suggest that generally young learners have more positive attitudes

compared to older learners. But this interest tends to decline over time (e.g. Burstall, 1975;

Chambers, 2000; MacIntyre et al., 2002; Nikolov, 1999). Nevertheless, findings of the Croatian

longitudinal project showed that under favorable teaching conditions, high motivation and

positive attitudes can be maintained over long periods of time (Mihaljevic´ Djigunovic´, 1998).

On the other hand, some studies haven’t discovered any significant age-related differences in

motivation and attitudes of young leaners of different age groups (Lasagabaster, 2003; Williams

et al., 2002). Some other studies (e.g. Julkunen & Borzova, 1996) also found mixed results.

A number of studies have been conducted to investigate the fluctuations in attitudes and

motivation of young learners with different starting ages. While Muñoz (2000) and Muñoz and

Tragant (2001) found no significant differences in motivation between children starting at ages

eight and 11, Cenoz (2004) found that those young learners that had started learning a FL earlier

had higher motivation, with larger differences existing between those that started at four years

and later starters than between those that started at eight or 11 years. Tragant (2006) indicated a

general pattern which implied a decline in positive attitudes around the age of 10–11.

Lopriore and Mihaljevic Djigunovic (2011) conducted a research study on the attitudinal

aspects of early EFL learning. Their aim was to recognize the initial attitudes of young beginners

of EFL, the developments of those attitudes from grade 1 to grade 2 and the relationship between

those attitudes and other aspects of early EFL learning such a language behavior and learning

achievement. A total of 91 Italian and Croatian EFL learners selected from among students with

different language learning abilities (high, average and low abilities) participated in the study.

The instruments used for measuring attitudes and classroom behavior included smiley

questionnaires and classroom observation and interview. The findings revealed that young

4

learners' initial attitudes towards EFL were mostly positive and with the exception of a few

students, these positive attitudes continued to grade 2.

In another study, Lopriore and Mihaljevic Djigunovic (2011) tried to explore the initial

feelings, attitudes and motivation of young EFL learners and change in their attitudinal and

motivational levels over three years of the primary school. Innovative methods in the form of

smiley questionnaires and oral interviews were used to elicit data from children. These data

triangulated with the data obtained from teachers, parents and classroom observations indicated

that young learners generally start FLL with very positive attitudes and high motivation. The

changes that happen in motivational levels are due to the novelty of new activities and

difficulties with language learning. The overly positive self-concept of young learners turns more

realistic because their awareness and ability to compare themselves with peers increases when

they grow up. Moreover, as children grow their individual learner characteristics associate with

language achievements more.

Mihaljevic Djigunovic (2012) looked into young FL learners' motivation under two

different sets of learning conditions. She intended to see whether young learners’ motivation and

attitudes for learning English would be significantly different in highly favorable and

unfavorable teaching settings. She concluded that young learners who learned English under

very favorable conditions (appropriately trained teacher, intensive classes, small groups) viewed

English as a favorite school subject more frequently and enjoyed age-appropriate class activities

(playing) more compared to learners who were exposed to formal learning under less favorable

conditions. Therefore, she claims that good conditions of learning should be secured at the very

start of FL learning. The first contact with the FL may be decisive for the young learner’s

attitudes and motivation for the rest of their life (Mihaljevic Djigunovic, 2012).

2.2. Children’s agency

“The field of SLA has been traditionally dominated by studies that explored children’s

second language performances from an adult perspective, using tests and tasks without involving

children more actively in the process of research” (Pinter, 2012: 108). Until recently researchers

when investigating children’s lives and aspects of childhood have been inclined to ask adult

respondents such as teachers and parents to give reports rather than children themselves (Scott,

2000). These inclinations may have been based on the belief that children are not as reliable

sources of information as adults are. However, there’s been increasing evidence indicating that

children themselves are the best sources of information as far as issues pertinent to them are

concerned.

Following the declaration of children’s rights by the United Nations Convention on the

Rights of the Child in article 12(1989) and the British Psychological Society’s Ethical Code’s

shift from ‘subjects’ to participants in the 1991 edition, a growing awareness has been fostered to

give children a more active participation in the research studies which are conducted on them

and in decisions which affect them (Pinter, 2012; Woodhead & Faulkner, 2000).

Davie (1993) in his paper ‘Listen to the child: a time for change’, argued that children’s

perspectives should be taken into consideration in areas of psychological work especially the

projects concerned with issues that affect children's lives. Davie’s claim was also directed at

academic researchers to refine their methods of data elicitation from children in order to

empathize with children’s experience, understand their beliefs and respect their concerns

(Woodhead and Faulkner, 2000). Pinter (2012) as well mentioned that traditional questionnaires

and interviews to investigate children’s opinions and views are not usually very well suited to

5

their needs. These assumptions have resulted in the development of innovative methods such as

‘participatory’ (e.g. Nagy,2009 and O’Kane,2000) and ‘visual’ methods (e.g. Johnson, 2008)

which can be used to elicit insights from children of all ages and compensate for young learners’

restricted linguistic abilities to express themselves.

2.3. Literacy Motivation

Literacy motivation is a multifaceted and complex entity. As the experts in the field

argue, motivation cannot be reduced to a single factor which people have or do not have. The

conceptual framework of literacy motivation is founded on renowned motivation constructs of

current motivation theories. Some of these constructs are concerned with individual's beliefs,

values, and goals for achievement and some others are related to the intrinsic and extrinsic

motivation and social motivation. These elements are pivotal to literacy motivation (Guthrie&

Wigfield, 1997; Wigfield, 2000). Thus, literacy motivation must be perceived with regard to

goals or reasons for reading or writing which may be associated with different aspects such as

task values, expectancies, self-efficacy, or goal orientation (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002; Guthrie et

al., 2007; Mazzoni, Gambrell, & Korkeamaki, 1999). People may have different reasons, goals,

and expectancies and subsequently be motivated in various ways. This multifaceted structure is

clearly perceptible from authors in the field of literacy considering reading and writing

motivation as multidimensional elements (Baker & Wigfield, 1999; Guthrie et al., 2009;

Hornery, Craven, Yueng & Ali, 2008; Pajares & Valiante, 2001;Pitcher et al., 2007; Schutte &

Malouff, 2007) and constructing instruments to identify reading and writing motivation with

several dimensions, allowing a multifaceted view of these constructs (Coddington &

Guthrie,2009; Codling & Gambrell, 1997; Garcia & Caso, 2004; Hornery et al.,2008; Pajares &

Valiante; Scher & Baker, 1997; Wigfield, Guthrie, & McGough,1996).

2.4. Gender Differences in Literacy Motivation

Gender is a variable that has the potential to affect motivation profiles. Various studies

have investigated the effects of gender differences on motivation which have reached a degree of

similitude with girls gaining higher motivational scores.

Wigfield and Guthrie (1997) found out a gender effect in fourth and fifth grade students

with girls achieving higher motivation with regard to reading efficacy, importance of reading,

and social reasons for reading and boys only being more motivated in terms of competition in

reading. Mazzoni et al. (1999) also came up with girls showing higher reading motivational

scores in first and second grades. Baker and Wigfield (1999) identified a similar effect in fifth-

and sixth-grade students for nine different reading motivation dimensions, with girls displaying

higher motivational scores than boys. Monteiro and Mata (2001) obtained the same results with

boys gaining higher motivation only in reading competition.

The same gender effect has been observed in reading attitudes too. McKenna (2001)

came up with some results in terms of reading attitudes which suggested that girls possessed

more positive attitudes than boys. The author held that the reason for this gender difference may

be the gender-specific beliefs about what others expect from reading. He furthermore explained

that although it is not clear yet that how these cultural expectations operate, research in different

cultural settings has not demonstrated any cultural specific expectations. Analogous gender

effects were also discovered with regard to motivation for writing which as well were in favor of

6

girls achieving higher motivation in most aspects of writing (e.g. Meece & Miller, 1999; Pajares,

Miller, & Johnson, 1999; and Pajares & Valiante, 1997).

2.5. The significance of reading motivation

Being able to read is not only important for academic success, but also as a general life

skill that is necessary in a literate society (McGeown, 2013). Within the young learners' reading

research field, the focus has been mostly on the development of cognitive (e.g., language,

decoding) skills to sustain and ameliorate children’s reading rather than a focus on increasing

motivation to read. However, researchers are increasingly becoming aware of the fact that

children’s motivation to read is decisive for their reading development. According to McGeown

(2013), children need both the skill and will in order to become successful readers. Since reading

is a purposeful and effortful activity which often involves preference and perseverance,

motivation is vital for children to develop their reading skills. Students’ motivation in reading at

a young age may have significant influence on later learning outcomes.

Many studies have investigated different aspects of young learners' reading motivation.

For instance, Wigfield (1997), Baker and Wigfield (1999), Wigfield, Guthrie, Tonks and

Perencevich (2004), and Hornery et al. (2008) studied the domain-specific and multidimensional

characteristics of reading motivation. Others inquired into the relationship between children's

attitudes and motivation for reading and their achievement and success in reading (e.g. Atkinson,

2006; Gambrell, Palmer, Codling & Mazzoni, 1996; Guthrie & Knowles, 2001; Mckenna, 2001;

Mckenna &Kear, 1990; Mckenna, Kear & Ellsworth, 1995; Morgan & Fuchs, 2007; Unrau &

Schlackman, 2006; Verhoven & Snow, 2001; Wang & Guthrie, 2004; and Wigfield & Guthrie,

1997). In addition, some others have studied the association of motivation with the achievements

in both reading and writing (e.g. Gambrell & Gillis, 2007; Mata, 2011; Nolen,2007; and Wilson

& Trainin, 2007). However, among all the research studies in the field of literacy motivation,

research on the effect of phonics (especially multisensory phonics) as a way of teaching literacy

on enhancing young learners' motivation for literacy has been very scant, if any at all.

Furthermore, most of the research in the area of reading and literacy motivation has been

conducted in the context of English as the mother tongue of the learners rather than ESL or EFL

context. In the present study, attempt has been made to observe the effect of using a

multisensory-based phonics approach (i.e. Jolly Phonics) in teaching early literacy skills on EFL

children's reading motivation, and this is where the present study departs from the studies

conducted in the literature.

As it was mentioned earlier, the instruments and questionnaires intended to elicit data

from children should make sense to them in order to make them engaged in the research process

and gain reliable data. To provide some examples of the research which used this kind of visual

child-friendly method for eliciting data on young learners' motivation and attitudes the studies by

Mckenna & Kear (1990) and Mihaljević Djigunović (2008) can be mentioned. Mckenna & Kear

(1990) made use of Garfield (the cartoon character) as the choices of their 4-point scale

questionnaire. They used this reader-friendly attention-getting questionnaire to collect data on

elementary students' attitudes toward recreational and academic reading. Each questionnaire item

contained 4 choices from the happiest to the saddest Garfield and the participants had to choose

one of the Garfields based on their feeling about that item, questioning their attitude toward one

of the aspects of reading. Mihaljević Djigunović (2008) also used a 3-point smiley questionnaire

containing happy, sad and indifferent smileys to obtain data on EFL young learners' attitudinal

aspects of early foreign language learning.

7

In the present study, the researcher, inspired by the work done in the previous literature,

has designed and developed a child-friendly questionnaire by using Sponge Bob (an attractive

cartoon character) as the choices of its items in order to find out whether using multisensory-

based phonics (Jolly Phonics) for teaching early literacy skills has any effect on enhancing young

learners' early reading motivation. The study also seeks to find out whether this multisensory

phonics approach affects girls’ and boys’ motivation differently, i.e. to see whether there is any

gender difference in the evaluations of the motivation questionnaire made by girls and boys.

3. Methodology

3.1. Research questions and hypotheses

The present study sought to find answer to the following questions:

1. Does multisensory approach to teaching phonics (i.e. Jolly phonics instruction) compared to

traditional phonics instruction have any significant effect on Iranian young EFL learners' reading

motivation?

2. Is there a significant difference between the evaluations made in the early reading motivation

questionnaire by girls and boys in the experimental group (i.e. the group to whom literacy was

taught through Jolly Phonics)?

Based on the above research questions, the following hypotheses were formulated:

1. The Jolly Phonics instruction adopted for teaching phonics to children will enhance young

learners' motivation in reading skills.

2. There isn’t any significant difference between the evaluations made in the early reading

motivation questionnaire by girls and boys in the experimental group (i.e. the group to whom

literacy was taught through Jolly Phonics).

3.2. Participants

One hundred participants (50 girls and 50 boys) ranging from 10-12 years old were

selected through non-random convenience sampling from among the EFL elementary learners in

Sokhansara Institute. The reason for selecting these students was that they were going to learn

English for the first time. Therefore, the utilization of each of the two phonics instruction

methods could be observed in teaching literacy to them.

In order to make sure that the students were homogeneous in terms of their oral language

and alphabet knowledge in English (i.e. to become sure that all of them were zero beginners of

English), the ones that had any familiarity with the alphabets or had studied English before in

any other institute or had been homeschooled in English were recognized prior to the treatment

and excluded from the study. Consequently, the permission of the head of the institute was

obtained for implementing the project. Also, parents of the students were informed about the

project and their consent was gained.

3.3. Treatment

This experimental study was conducted during an English summer course and lasted for

30 sessions. The learners were assigned to eight Starter classes (four girls’ classes and four boys’

classes) according to their age and their elementary education levels (zero beginners) by the

institute. Two of the girls’ classes were selected as the control group and the other two were

chosen as the experimental group. Similarly, two of the boys’ classes were considered to be the

8

control group and the other two were opted for the experimental group. Each class had an

average number of 15 students. As a result, we had four control groups including about 50

students (approximately 25 girls and 25 boys) and four experimental groups including about 50

students (approximately 25 girls and 25 boys). The teachers who were selected for teaching the

experimental classes had been trained in the Jolly Phonics workshop.

The students would attend the English classes 6 days a week. The treatment was carried

out in thirty 90-minute sessions. Forty five minutes of each session was devoted to teaching

literacy skills through the Jolly Phonics program and the other 45 minutes was allotted to

teaching other language skills and sub skills, i.e. the simple dialogues, songs, structures and

vocabulary items in the children’s textbook.

The 42 main sounds of English were taught in the following order of seven groups not in

the alphabetical order.

This allows the possibility of forming very simple three-letter words from the very early stages.

For example, the words pin, pan, tip, sat could be formed when the first group of sounds is

taught. Each of the above letter sounds were introduced to children via its related action, song

and story. Then, the correct way of letter formation was taught with teacher showing the

formation on the board. The children would follow the teacher’s movement simultaneously

showing the letter formation in the air and tracing the dotted letters with their finger in their pupil

book or the big finger phonics books. This multisensory approach offers children movement,

sight, hearing and speech to help them remember and motivates them to learn literacy skills

(Jolly, 2012). After that, the teacher would teach blending and segmenting in order to aid

children with reading and writing. Students were taught how to sound out the individual sounds

in the words and then mixing them together to read the words. Furthermore, they learnt to listen

carefully for the sounds in words by holding up a finger for each sound and then write the words.

The words which have irregular spellings are referred to as tricky words in Jolly phonics method.

Since these words couldn’t be learnt by blending and segmenting skills, they were taught by

practice, repetition and further exposure through different techniques such as word walls and

mnemonics. These 5 basic literacy skills, namely learning the letter-sounds, letter formation,

blending, segmenting and tricky words were all taught and revised using the flash cards, posters,

games and other intriguing materials offered and provided by the Jolly Learning Ltd during the

course.

3.4. Instruments

At the end of the course, a 4-poin Likert scale questionnaire was administered to all the

participants. This Early Reading Motivation Questionnaire (ERMQ) had 23 items in learners’

mother tongue (Farsi) (See Appendix). The items of the questionnaire were derived from 2

standard questionnaires: Young Reader Motivation Questionnaire (Coddington & Guthrie, 2009)

and Reading Motivation (Adapted from Jingle Jangle) (Hornery et al., 2008, Based on Jingle

Jangle, Marsh et.al., 2003) and were adapted to the aims of the study. The items were in the form

9

of declarative statements rather than questions. Every item had 4 choices (very much, a lot, a

little, a little bit). In addition, there was a picture of a colorful Sponge Bob on top of each choice.

The participants were required to choose one of the choices according to the color of the Sponge

Bob. The color of the Sponge Bob would decrease as the degree of agreement to each question

declined in every choice. The Sponge Bob for the first choice (very much) was totally colorful,

the Sponge Bob for the second choice (a lot) was half colorful, for the third choice (a little) only

one third of the Sponge Bob was colored and for the fourth choice (a little bit) approximately

one fourth of the Sponge Bob was colored. In fact, Sponge Bob was supposed to lead children

through selecting the choice which was closer to their opinion or feeling about each statement.

According to Mihaljević Djigunović (2012), children sometimes find it difficult to

express their thoughts, perceptions and feelings. Therefore, it is crucial that appropriate

instruments and procedures be used for eliciting data on attitudes and motivation of young

learners. To achieve this objective, usually smiley questionnaires are used with young learners.

Since they include visual scales to which children can easily relate their idea or feeling, they are

very age-appropriate for young learners. In these types of questionnaires, children choose a sad,

happy or indifferent smiley according to how they think or feel about the language learning

aspect in question.

Since the statements of the questionnaire in our study were not in line in terms of

negativity and positivity of meaning, we couldn’t use happy and sad smileys in the choices. So

we decided to resort to a cartoon character, which was supposed to be the favorite for the

majority of children, and we set the degree of its colorfulness as the criterion of selection for

each choice.

3.4.1. Reliability and validity of the ERMQ

Using Cronbach’s alpha, the internal consistency (reliability) of the ERMQ was

estimated. The results indicated the reliability index of 0.766 for the questionnaire.

With regard to validity, the ERMQ enjoys content validity by nature because it measures

the reading motivational states of the young learners, which is compatible with the objectives of

the study.

Before being administered to the participants, ERMQ was given to several M.A students,

Ph.D. students and university teachers of the University of Isfahan in order to be examined,

evaluated and edited in terms of content and face validity. The questionnaire was subsequently

qualified as being valid by the experts except a few items which were modified to meet the

viewpoints of the experts.

After receiving the experts’ judgment, the questionnaire was piloted with a similar group

of zero beginners at the same age who were not the target participants of the study. Issues

regarding the administration, the required time, clarity of the questionnaire items as well as their

rubric were inspected in this pilot study. Besides, two items in the ERMQ were indicated as

ambiguous for students in the pilot study. Therefore, these items were modified in order to be

comprehensible to young learners.

3.4.2. Scoring procedures of ERMQ

Two different scoring schemes were employed for analyzing experimental and control

groups' data on the ERMQ: (i) raw scores or raw ratings and (ii) weighted scores or weighted

ratings. Raw scores were identical with the actual number assigned to each point of the 4-point

Likert scale (1 = A little bit, 2 = A little, 3 = A lot, and 4 = very much). Weighted scores were

10

based on different weightings given to each point of the 4-point scale in the ERMQ. In order to

determine the participants’ weighted scores, separate scoring procedures were used for

positively-loaded and negatively-loaded items. The scoring scheme for the 4-point Likert scale

used in the motivation questionnaire was the following:

Table 1.

The scheme of weighted scores on the motivation questionnaire

Positively-loaded items Negatively-loaded items

Very much = 4 A little bit= 4

A lot = 3 A Little = 3

A Little = 2 A lot = 2

A little bit = 1 Very much = 1

4. Data analysis

A set of descriptive and inferential statistics were used to answer the two research questions

in this study. With regard to descriptive statistical procedures, mean and percentage analysis on

the data collected from the ERM questionnaire were conducted. Concerning the inferential

statistics, since the number of participants in each group was below 30, a Mann-Whitney U Test

which is the non-parametric alternative to the independent-samples t-test was used to interpret

the participants' answers to the questionnaire’ items.The mean scores of students in responding

to items in the early reading motivation questionnaire (ERMQ) administered to the learners in

each group are presented in Table 2.

Table 2 Descriptive statistics of the experimental and control groups

N Minimum Maximum Mean SD

Experim

ental

Female 25 77 90 84.16 4.12

Male 25 80 92 87 3.20

Total 50 77 92 85.58 3.92

Contro

l

Female 25 57 92 78.96 7.27

Male 25 68 90 80.16 4.96

Total 50 57 92 79.56 6.19

The total mean score of ERMQ for students in the experimental group (Jolly Phonics group) was

85.58 and for those in the control group was 79.56. The mean score of the questionnaire for the

girls of experimental and control group was respectively 84.16 and 78.96. The mean score of the

questionnaire for the boys of experimental and control group was respectively 87 and 80.16. The

summary of the data are also illustrated in figure 1 below:

11

Figure 1. The mean and standard deviation of the scores of

girls/boys in the experimental/control group

In order to compare the mean scores in the experimental and control groups, a Man-Whitney U

Test was used. Table 3 represents the Mann-Whitney U Test applied to the means:

Table 3

Mann-Whitney U Test on the mean scores of experimental and

control group

Reading N Mean Rank Sum of Ranks

Experimental 50 65.48 3274.00

Control 50 35.52 1776.00

Total 100

Mann-Whitney U 501.000

Z -5.173

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .000

As it is shown in the table above, the mean score of the 50 students in the experimental group is

65.48 and the mean score of the 50 learners in the control group is 35.52. Furthermore, p=0, i.e.

p<0.05 which is significant. Thus, it is concluded that there is a significant difference between

the reading motivation of the students in the control and those in the experimental group. In other

words, those young learners who learnt early English literacy skills through the multisensory-

based phonics approach were more motivated in English reading than those who were taught

literacy skills through the traditional phonics approach.

Another Mann-Whitney U Test was used to compare the mean scores of girls in each of

the control and experimental groups, as shown in Table 4 below:

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Exp-Girls Exp-Boyes Ctrl-Girls Corl-Boyes

Chart Title

Mean

St.d

12

Table 4

Mann-Whitney U Test on the mean scores of girls in the

experimental and control group



Control 25 15.98 399.50

Total 50


Z -4.629


As it is demonstrated in the above table, the mean score of the 25 girls in the experimental group

is 35.02 and the mean score of the girls in the control group is 15.98. The P value is 0 (p=0), i.e.

p<0.05 which shows a significant difference between the mean scores of girls in the

experimental and control groups.

For comparing the mean scores of boys in each of the experimental and control groups, a

third Mann-Whitney U Test was run, as given in Table 5 in the following:

Table 5

Mann-Whitney U Test on the mean scores of boys in the

experimental and control group



Control 25 19.58 489.50

Total 50


Z -2.878


According to the table, the mean score of the 25 boys in the experimental group is 31.42 whereas

the mean score of the 25 boys in the control group is 19.58. Moreover, the p value is 0.004

(p=0.004), i.e. p<0.05 which displays a significant difference between the mean scores of the

boys in the experimental and control groups.

The second research question investigated whether there was a significant difference

between the evaluations made by the girls and the boys in the experimental group of the YRM

questionnaire In order to answer this question, a fourth Mann-Whitney U Test was used, as given

below in Table 6:

Table 6

Mann-Whitney U Test on the scores of boys and girls in the

experimental group

13

Reading- Experimental N Mean Rank Sum of Ranks

Boy 25 30.40 760.00

Girl 25 20.60 515.00

Total 50


Z -2.386


As it is displayed in the table above, the mean score of the 25 boys in the experimental group is

30.4 while the mean score of girls is 20.6. Besides, the P value is 0.017 (p=0.017), i.e. p<0.05,

which shows a significant difference between the scores of girls and boys in the experimental

group. Therefore, it can be concluded that by using the Jolly Phonics method for teaching

English literacy, boys became more motivated to learn early English reading skills than girls.

5. Discussion and conclusion

The primary purpose of this research study was to inquire into possible effects of

adopting a multisensory-based phonics approach (i.e. Jolly Phonics) in teaching early literacy

skills on children's motivation for reading in early stages. It, also, intended to find out whether

this approach to teaching phonics affects girls' and boys' reading motivation differently. The

results of data analysis for the ERMQ indicated that jolly phonics method contributed to

enhancing young learners' early reading motivation. Regarding the gender differences in reading motivation, the results arrived at by

analyzing the results of ERMQ suggested that the multisensory-based phonics (i.e. Jolly phonics)

contributed to boys' reading motivation more than girls'. This finding opposes Baker and

Wigfield (1999) who found out a gender effect in fifth and sixth-grade students for nine different

reading motivation dimensions, with girls displaying higher motivational scores than boys. It

also contrasts with McKenna (2001) that came up with some results in terms of reading attitudes

which suggested that girls possessed more positive attitudes than boys. Moreover, as opposed to

Mazzoni et al. (1999) that came up with girls showing higher reading motivational scores in first

and second grades, our study discovered boys to be more motivated in reading. However, this

finding is partly in agreement with Wigfield and Guthrie (1997) who concluded that boys were

only more motivated in terms of competition in reading. It is as well partially in accordance with

Monteiro and Mata (2001) who obtained the same results with boys gaining higher motivation

only in reading competition.

The possible explanation for the overall differing outcomes of our study with regard to

boys gaining higher motivational scores could be due to the multisensory and funny

characteristics of Jolly phonics method. The stories, songs, and actions in this method are very

child-friendly and have originally been devised in line with the preferences and favorites of 3-6

year old native children in the first place. Thus, the younger the learners, the more they will

enjoy the funny techniques introduced in Jolly Phonics. The participants of our study were 10-12

year olds (fourth, fifth and sixth graders of primary school) with the mean age of eleven.

Whereas, girls usually reach the puberty at the age of 11, boys commonly enter puberty at least

at the age of 14. Accordingly, in the age of 10-12, boys still have the immature and child-like

characteristics of a child or a young person. Therefore, while boys of this age respond to the

14

child-like actions and activities offered by Jolly phonics with more enthusiasm, girls may tend to

see these actions as childish and not appropriate for their age, and hence be less motivated to

connect with the method.

To sum up, the findings of the present study advocated that the multisensory method of

Jolly Phonics contributed to higher reading motivation of students in early stages of learning

English literacy. Undoubtedly, the reason for achieving these results is that the students in the

control group were taught English literacy through the rote traditional phonics, which lacks any

form of motivation for children as the knowledge acquired through rote learning cannot be easily

applicable to new (unseen) words. However, the learners in the experimental group learnt

literacy skills via Jolly Phonics which results in systematic literacy learning by presenting a

multisensory child-centered approach for teaching the key skills for reading and writing.

The results of this study may add to the inadequate body of research conducted on young

learners' motivational profiles in the EFL context specifically in the domain of literacy learning.

The findings might be helpful for all young beginners of English who have turned desperate by

the dull and rote phonics methods for learning literacy skills and are therefore looking for ways

to overcome the difficulties they encounter with forming and writing letters and blending the

sounds together to read and write new words, especially the tricky words which have irregular

spellings. Furthermore, the results may be useful for the teachers and even parents of the young

learners who are dealing with the first steps of learning literacy in English. The findings can also

be beneficial for the language institutes and schools to enhance their students’ satisfaction by

offering a fun and motivating method for teaching English literacy skills to the children. Teacher

trainers and curriculum designers may also benefit from the results.

One of the limitations of this study was the short period of time that we had for running

the treatment. It takes at least about a school year (about 9 months) for the Jolly Phonics program

to reveal its beneficial effects on literacy skills of students (S. Darby, personal communication,

March 15, 2014). But due to the time limitations that we had, we were constrained to measure

the reading motivation of students only on word level. Therefore, further research in the form of

longitudinal studies is required in order to assess the young learners’ reading motivation over a

longer period of time and on sentential and textual level.

Furthermore, the participants of our study were 10-12 year-old students. Thus, the

findings cannot be generalized to learners of younger age groups. Subsequently, replicating the

study with a group of younger age group can be suggested.

In addition to that, in this study the motivational profiles of students were evaluated

solely with regard to the reading skills. Hence, there is a need for further research studies to

investigate into the effect of multisensory-based phonics on other language skills such as writing

or the attitudes and motivation of children towards learning English in general.

Moreover, to estimate the reading motivation of students, we used a 4-point Likert scale

questionnaire and we made use of the cartoon character “Sponge Bob” as its choices for visually

attracting and sustaining children’s involvement in the process of research. But, there still

remains the need for devising alternative assessment techniques such as open-ended

questionnaires similar to Nagy’s study (2009) in which more participatory techniques can be

engaged.

Last but not least, as for the control group, the rote traditional phonics was adopted to

teach English literacy. Since comparing Jolly phonics with other phonics method such as analytic

15

phonics may lead to different results, further research can apply other phonics methods to be

compared with the effect of multisensory-based phonics on children’s motivation.

6. References Atkinson, C. (2006). Key stage 3 pupils’ views about reading. Educational Psychology in

Practice, 22, 321–336.

Baker, L., & Wigfield, A. (1999). Dimensions of children’s motivation for reading and their

relations to reading activity and reading achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 34,

452–477.

British Psychological Society (BPS) (1991). Code of Conduct, Ethical Principles and Guidelines,

Leicester: BPS.

Burstall, C. (1975). Primary French in the Balance. Foreign Language Annals, 10(3), 245–252.

Cassandra S. Coddington, & John T. Guthrie, (2009). Young Reader Motivation Questionnaire,

University of Maryland.

Chambers, G. (2000). Motivation and the learners of modern languages. In S. Green (Ed.), New

perspectives on teaching and learning modern languages (pp. 46–76). Clevedon:

Multilingual Matters.

Codling, M. R., & Gambrell, L. (1997). The motivation to write profile: An assessment tool for

elementary teachers. Athens, GA: National Reading Research Center.

Davie, R., (1993). Listen to the child: A time for change. The Psychologist 6(6): 252–257.

Dörnyei, Z. (1990). Conceptualizing motivation in foreign language learning. Language

Learning, 40(1), 45–78.

Eccles, J., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational Beliefs, values and goals. Annual Review

Psychology, 53, 109–132.

Edelenbos, P., Johnstone, R., & Kubanek, A. (2007). Languages for the Children of Europe:

Published Research, Good practice and Main Principles. Retrieved May 31, 2014 from

the World Wide Web: http//ec.europa,eu/education/policies/lang/doc/youngsum_en.pdf

Enever, J. (Ed.) (2011). ELLiE: Early language learning in Europe. London, UK: The British

Council.

Gambrell, L., & Gillis, V. (2007). Assessing children’s motivation for reading and writing. In J.

Paratore & R. McCormack (Eds.), Classroom literacy assessment: Making sense of what

students know and do (pp. 50–64). New York, NY: Guilford.

Gambrell, L., Palmer, B., Codling, R., & Mazzoni, S. (1996). Assessing motivation to read.

international reading association, 49, 518–533.

Garcia, J., & Caso, A. (2004). Effects of a motivational intervention for improving the writing of

children with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 27, 141–159.

Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social Psychology and Second Language Learning: The Role of Attitudes

and Motivation. London, UK: Edward Arnold.

Gardner, R. C. (2010). Motivation and Second Language Acquisition: The Socio-Educational

Model. NewYork: Peter Lang.

Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1959). Motivational Variables in Second Language

Acquisition. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 13(4), 266–272.

Guthrie, J., & Knowles, K. (2001). Promoting Reading Motivation. In L. Verhoven & C. Snow

(Eds.), Literacy and Motivation: Reading Engagement in Individuals and Groups (pp.

159–176). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

16

Guthrie, J., McRae, A., Coddington, C., Klauda, S., Wigfield, A., & Barbosa, P.(2009). Impacts

of Comprehensive Reading Instruction on Diverse Outcomes of Low and High-achieving

Readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 195–214.

Guthrie, J., McRae, A., & Klauda, S. (2007). Contributions of Concept-oriented Reading

Instruction to Knowledge about Interventions for Motivations in Reading. Educational

Psychologist, 42, 237–250.

Guthrie, J., & Wigfield, A. (1997). Reading engagement: A rationale for theory and teaching. In

J. Guthrie & A. Wigfield (Eds), Reading engagement. Motivating readers through

integrated instruction (pp. 1–12). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Hornery, S., Craven, R., Yeung, A., & Ali, J. (2008). A New Multi-Dimensional Domain-

Specific Motivation Questionnaire: AARE annual conference (pp. 1–14). Brisbane:

Australian Association for Research in Education.

Hornery, S., Craven, R., Yeung, A., & Ali, J. (2008). Reading Motivation (Adapted from Jingle

Jangle), Base on Jingle Jangle, Marsh, H. W., Craven, R., Hinkely, J. W., & Debus, R. L. (2003)

Johnson, K. (2008). Teaching children to use visual research methods. In P. Thomson (Ed.),

Doing visual research with children and young people. London: Routledge.

Jolly, C. (2012). Jolly phonics extra. Teacher’s book. Malaysi: Jolly Learning Ltd.

Julkunen, K., & Borzova, H. (1996). English language learning motivation in Joensuu and

Petrozavodsk. Joensuu: University of Joensuu.

Lasagabaster, D. (2003). Attitudes towards English in the Basque autonomous community.

World Englishes, 22, 585–597.

Lopriore, L., Mihaljević Djigunović, J. (2011). Attitudinal aspects of early EFL learning. In J. H.

Gábor Szabó, UPRT 2009: Empirical studies in English applied linguistics (pp. 3–11).

Lingua Franca Csoport .

Mata, L. (2011). Motivation for reading and writing in kindergarten. Reading Psychology, 32,

272–299.

Marsh, H. W., Craven, R., Hinkley, J. W., & Debus, R. L. (2003). Evaluation of the big two

factor theory of motivation orientation: An evaluation of jingle-jingle fallacies.

Multivariate Behavioral Research, 38, 189–224.

Mazzoni, S., Gambrell, L., & Korkeamaki, R. (1999). A cross-cultural perspective of early

literacy motivation. Journal of Reading Psychology, 20, 237–253.

McKenna, M. (2001). Development of reading attitudes. In L. Verhoeven & C. Snow (Eds.),

Literacy and motivation: Reading engagement in individuals and groups (pp. 135–158).

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Mckenna, M., Kear, D. (2003). Measuring attitude toward reading: A new tool for teachers. The

Reading Teacher, 626–639.

McKenna, M., Kear, D., & Ellsworth, R. (1995). Children’s attitudes toward reading: A national

survey. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 934–955.

Meece, J., & Miller, S. (1999). Changes in elementary school children’s achievement goals for

reading and writing: Results of a longitudinal and intervention study. Scientific Studies of

Reading, 3, 207–229.

Mihaljevic Djigunovic, J. (2012). Attitudes and motivation in early foreign language learning.

CEPS Journal, 55–74.

17

Mihaljević Djigunović, J., & Lopriore, L. (2011). The learner: Do individual differences matter?

In J. Enever (Ed.), ELLiE: Early language learning in europe (pp. 29–45). London, UK:

The British Council.

Monteiro, V., & Mata, L. (2001). Motivação para a leitura em crianças do 1,2, 3 e 4 ano de

escolaridade [Reading motivation in students from 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th grades].

Infância e Educação. Investigação e Práticas, 3, 49–68.

Morgan, P., & Fuchs, D. (2007). Is there a bidirectional relationship between children’s reading

skills and reading motivation? Exceptional Children, 73, 165–183.

Nagy, K. (2009). What primary school pupils think about learning English as a foreign language.

In M. Nikolov (ED.), Early learning of modern foreign languages: Processes and

outcomes (pp. 229-242). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Nikolov, M. (2002). Issues in English language education. Bern: Peter Lang.

Nikolov, M. (1999). “Why do you learn English?” “Because the teacher is short”: A study of

Hungarian children’s foreign language learning motivation. Language Teaching

Research, 3(1), 33–65.

Nolen, S. (2007). Young children’s motivation to read and write: Development in social

contexts. Cognition and Instruction, 25, 219–270.

O'Kane, C. (2000). The development of participatory techniques: Facilitating children's views

about decisions which affect them. In P. Christensen, & A. James (Eds.), Research with

children: Perspectives and practices (pp. 125–155). London. Routledge.

Pajares, F., & Cheong, Y. (1997). Achievement goal orientations in writing: A developmental

perspective. International Journal of Education Research, 39, 437–455.

Pajares, F., Miller, D., & Johnson, M. (1999). Gender differences in writing self-beliefs of

elementary school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91,50–61.

Pajares, F., & Valiante, G. (2001). Gender differences in writing motivation and achievement of

middle school students: A function of gender orientation. Contemporary Educational

Psychology, 26, 366–381.

Pinter, A. (2012). Teaching young learners. In A. B. Richards, pedagogy and practice in second

language teaching (pp. 103–111). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in

learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667–686.

Pitcher, S., Albright, L., DeLaney, C., Walker, N., Seunarinesingh, K., Mogge,S., Dunston, P.

(2007). Assessing adolescents’ motivation to read. Journal of Adolescent & Adult

Literacy, 50, 378–396.

Scher, D., & Baker, L. (1997). Children’s conceptions and motivations regarding reading and

their relations to parental ideas and home experiences. In Serpell, R., Sonnenschein, S., &

Baker, L. (Eds), In patters of emerging competence and sociocultural context in the early

approprioation of literacy. Symposium conducted at the meeting for the society for

research in child development,Washington, DC.

Schutte, N., & Malouff, J. (2007). Dimensions of reading motivation: Development of an adult

reading motivation scale. Reading Psychology, 28, 469–489.

Scott, J. (2000). Children as respondents. In P. C. James, Research with children: Perspectives

and practices (pp. 98-119). Falmer Press.

Szpotowicz, M., Mihaljevic Djigunovic, J., & Enever, J. (2009). Early language learning in

Europe: A multinational, longitudinal study. In J. Enever, J. Moon & U. Raman (Eds.),

18

Young learner English language policy and implementation: International perspectives

(pp. 141–147). Kent, UK: IATEFL.

Teaching Literacy with Jolly Phonics (2014, December). Retrieved from http:

//jollylearning.co.uk/overview-about-jolly-phonics/

Tragant, R., & Muñoz, C. (2000). La motivación y su relación con la edad en un contexto escolar

de aprendizaje de una lengua extranjera.[Motivation and its relationship to age in

language learning in the school context]. In C. Muñoz (Ed.), Segundas Lenguas.

Adquisición en el Aula (pp. 81–105). Barcelona: Ariel.

United Nations. (1989). United nations conventions on the rights of the child. New York: United

Nations.

Unrau, N., & Schlackman, J. (2006). Motivation and its relationship with reading achievement in

an urban middle school. The Journal of Educational Research,100, 81–101.

Verhoven, L., & Snow, C. (2001). Literacy and motivation: Bridging cognitive and sociocultural

viewpoints. In L. Verhoven & C. Snow (Eds.), Literacy and motivation: Reading

engagement in individuals and groups (pp. 1–20). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Vilke, M. (1979). English as a foreign language at the age of eight. SRAZ, 24, 297–336.

Wang, J., Guthrie, J. (2004). Moddeling the effects of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation,

amount of reading and past reading achievement on text comprehension between U.S.

and Chinese students. International reading association, 39, 162-186.

Wigfield, A. (1997). Reading motivation: A domain-Specific approach to motivation.

Educational Psychologist, 32, 59-68.

Wigfield, A. (2000). Facilitating children’s reading motivation. In L. Baker, M.Dreher, & J.

Guthrie (Eds.), Engaging young readers—Promoting achievement and motivation (pp.

140–158). New York, NY: Guilford.

Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. (1997). Relations of children’s motivation for reading to the amount

and breadth of their reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 420–432.

Wigfield, A., Guthrie, J., & McGough, K. (1996). A questionnaire measure of children’s

motivations for reading. (Instructional resource no 22). Athens, GA: National Reading

Research Centre.

Williams, M., Burden, R., & Lanvers, U. (2002). ‘French is the language of love and stuff’:

Student perceptions of issues related to motivation in learning a foreign language. British

Educational Research Journal, 28(4), 504–528.

Wilson, K., & Trainin, G. (2007). First-grade students’ motivation and achievement for reading,

writing, and spelling. Reading Psychology, 28, 257–282.

Woodhead, M., Faulkner, D.(2000). Subjects, objects or participants? Dilemmas of

psychological research with children. In P. C. James, Research with children:

Perspectives and practices (pp. 9-35). London: Falmer Press.

7. Appendix

Age: ____ Girl Boy

Please read the following questions carefully and choose the best answer which you think suits

your idea according to the color of Sponge Bob.

19

1. I can work out hard English words by myself without getting extra help.

Very much A lot A little A little bit

2. I can read the English words of my course book very well.


3. I can even read English words that I haven’t seen in my course book before.


4. When reading English words, I can work out the sounds in words very well.


5. I enjoy reading English words.


6. I’m sure that I’ll be able to read English story books in a near future.


20

7. I like to practice reading English words at home too.


8. Playing word games in the class is fun for me.


9. I have difficulty reading English words.


10. I make lots of mistakes when reading English words.


11. I need extra help when reading English words.


12. I like my teacher’s method of teaching English letter sounds.


21

13. I think the method my teacher uses to teach reading English words is very interesting

and helpful.


14. When I see my improvement in reading English words, I feel clever.


15. I really enjoy it when I can read English words by sounding out the letter sounds all by

myself.


16. I like to read English words with other students and in groups.


17. I learn better when I read English words with my friends putting our ideas together.


18. I enjoy helping my classmates read English words.


22

19. I like to do better in reading English words than other students.


20. I learn better when I try to read English words better than my friends.


21. I like to volunteer to read English words in the class.


22. I feel that my classmates are better at reading English words than me.


23. When reading English words in the class, I feel stressed out.


Documents

Leila Farokhbakht, M.A. TEFL, University of Isfahan, Iran Effect of Using... · 2 children. The available options were either to adapt them to the needs and requisites of younger